Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    The Buzz's Avatar
    The Buzz is offline GPWA Gossip Hound
    Join Date
    February 2007
    Location
    Newton, MA
    Posts
    3,595
    Thanks
    295
    Thanked 1,498 Times in 907 Posts

    Default US Department of Justice standing by interpretation of the Wire Act

    The U.S. Department of Justice has added another extension to its enforcement of the new Wire Act opinion to 30 June 2020. The move comes while the DOJ continues its appeal against the New Hampshire Lottery Commission, which won its case back in June.

    From Online Poker Report:

    Unsatisfied with the loss it took in District Court — and apparently determined to press forward with its new interpretation of the Wire Act — the government appealed.

    The appellants advance three main arguments as to why the previous decision should be reversed:

    1. The threat of prosecution to the plaintiffs is not imminent and credible.
    2. The District Court was wrong in holding that the Wire Act only applies to sports betting.
    3. The District Court was wrong to “set aside” the 2018 OLC memo.
    The government continues to advance the arguments it made in District Court. It is not unusual for a party to narrow their arguments on appeal, but that does not appear to be the case here.

    Next we will expect a brief from the plaintiffs — the NHLC and lottery providers represented by Ted Olson. This brief is due 30 days from Dec. 20, 2019. After that, the appellants will again have the opportunity to respond.

    This is only the beginning of a case that is likely to take us through the first part of 2020, with a potential that we see a petition to the Supreme Court regardless of what the First Circuit says.

    Through its brief, the Department of Justice suggests that it will not back down from this fight over the scope of the Wire Act.
    Read more here: https://www.onlinepokerreport.com/39...re-act-appeal/

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to The Buzz For This Useful Post:

    ddm (24 December 2019), ocreditor (26 December 2019)

  3. #2
    PokCas is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    February 2019
    Posts
    298
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thanks
    196
    Thanked 68 Times in 48 Posts

    Default

    So what could this lead to?

  4. #3
    ocreditor's Avatar
    ocreditor is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    April 2009
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    5,482
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    5,585
    Thanked 3,622 Times in 2,230 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PokCas View Post
    So what could this lead to?
    More procrastination, more ping-pong and more appeals...

  5. #4
    PROFRBcom's Avatar
    PROFRBcom is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    April 2013
    Posts
    1,888
    Thanks
    1,370
    Thanked 1,095 Times in 707 Posts

    Default

    The DOJ has flip flopped its interpretation of the Wire Act more times than I can count in the last 2 decades.
    It seems like every new administration changes the interpretation. And even within a single administration, the DOJ interpretation can change.

    It is a giant cluster **** and no one really knows what will happen moving forward. However, my guess is crippling regulation and bureaucracy that only allows for deep pocketed players as both providers and affiliates.
    https://professionalrakeback.com

    We have bullet-proof revenue-share deals on online poker networks that:
    A) no longer allow them
    B) do not like winning poker players
    C) charge insane fees

    Interested in a sub deal?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •